A governance perspective on the large marine ecosystem approach

The large marine ecosystem (LME) concept and approach has had a global impact on marine ecosystem-based management. The LME approach provides a framework for assessing and monitoring LMEs and is based on five modules: productivity, fish and fisheries, pollution and ecosystem health, socioeconomics, and governance. It appears that the LME approach is also being used to structure interventions to bring about change. Its appropriateness for the latter purpose is questioned. The major concerns are that the LME approach is not consistent with current thinking about enabling governance and its compartmentalized structure does not facilitate effective governance intervention. Current thinking on good governance suggests that it is more appropriate to approach governance interventions at the LME scale through multi-level governance policy cycles.     

Governance characteristics of large marine ecosystems

The Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) concept is widely established as a large-scale approach to coastal and marine management. LME-oriented activities have focused mainly on natural sciences. Socioeconomic and governance aspects have only recently been receiving increased attention. The 64 LMEs that have been defined appeared to exhibit considerable diversity in characteristics that would be expected to affect governability. This paper explores two questions: (1) Do the LMEs vary widely enough in geopolitical complexity that different approaches to governance may be required for different LMEs? (2) Are there groups of LMEs within which one might take similar approaches to governance? The analysis demonstrates that there is considerable heterogeneity among LMEs with regard to characteristics that would be expected to affect governability. It concludes that a diversity of governance approaches will be required to cope with this heterogeneity. It also appears that LMEs can be grouped according to these characteristics. This suggests that different approaches could be considered for clusters rather than for individual LMEs and that there can be sharing of experience and learning within clusters. The types of relationships between features of LMEs and the ‘best’ approaches to marine governance are discussed in the context of emerging governance ideas.     

England's evolving marine and coastal governance framework

This paper reviews the principal marine and coastal policy changes in England since 1999. The key changes identified are the establishment of a strategic national marine and coastal policy direction, new marine legislation and institutions, the emergence of a marine planning framework, the consolidation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management approaches to coastal governance, the establishment of a Marine Protected Area network, and the decline of coastal partnerships. The European Union, UK National Government, and devolved administrations are identified as key influences on the governance evolution and their relative contributions are discussed. It is concluded that the English marine and coastal governance context has evolved significantly since 1999 and that the new framework, if implemented successfully, represents a genuine step towards an integrated governance framework for England's coasts and seas.     

Applying the large marine ecosystem (LME) governance framework in the Wider Caribbean Region

The large marine ecosystem (LME) governance framework was developed to address the complexity inherent within the Wider Caribbean Region with respect to the region's shared living marine resources. The framework is adaptable to all multi-scale living marine resource situations and provides a basis for incremental implementation of interventions. Parts of the overall governance framework can be targeted for sub-framework development and strengthening through institutional reforms and capacity building. Three examples, the Eastern Caribbean flyingfish fishery, marine protected area (MPA) management and the Eastern Caribbean tuna fishery, are used to illustrate the application of the framework in facilitating and assessing governance effectiveness in the Caribbean. In each case, the purpose is to show the different governance questions that must be addressed at policy, strategy and action levels to make up a complete governance arrangement and how these are distributed among several levels on the institutional scale that typically occur in regional marine resource governance.     

Marine informational governance,a conceptual framework

Marine governance involves interaction between networks and actors from different types and levels of organizations. The concept of multi-level or network governance steps away from the assumptions that supra-national and national government at the macro level is the dominant policy making unit. At all levels information is crucial, among others to overcome social dilemmas of collective action in marine resource use and management. In this paper theories of multi-level governance, of collective action, of trust and of information economics will be linked to the idea of the increasing importance of information, information technologies and information processes in environmental governance, which is termed ‘informational governance’. This linking of theories and concepts results in a new and innovative framework to better understand the changing role of information in marine resource management, enterprises, institutions and actual practices of governance. The framework will help to investigate the effectiveness of informational governance in solving problems related to marine resources.     

The triangle of marine governance in the environmental governance of Dutch offshore platforms

In this paper, we develop the triangle of marine governance to understand the changing locus and focus of marine governance practices. In general, the locus and focus of marine governance is shifting from top-down, state-led governance to network governance. This shift is captured by the triangle of marine governance, because the triangle refers to the institutional setting in which politics and policy making takes place (polity), to policy making itself (policy), to activities of politicians and processes of power (politics), and to the interplay between policy, politics and polity. Studying the dynamics of politics and policies in marine governance practices through the triangle allows us to analyze and explain how and why the shifts in locus and focus occur. These dynamics of marine governance—as the interplay of policy, politics and policy—is illustrated by the environmental governance of Dutch offshore platforms.     

Ocean governance in the South Pacific region: Progress and plans for action

The Pacific Island Regional Ocean Policy (PIROP), which was released in 2002, provided the framework for ocean governance in the Pacific region. Since then there have been a myriad of policy documents and institutional arrangements that have been developed to address ocean governance issues, however, little progress has occurred with regard to the actual implementation of PIROP. This paper examines the region's progress in establishing integrated oceans management, and how this fits with the use of marine spatial planning and area based management tools, such as marine protected areas. It argues that policy making in this region encounters the usual difficulties with integrated policy approaches experienced elsewhere but that these difficulties are further accentuated when applied to developing nations that are highly dependent on external support. It suggests a way forward for the future with development of action plans, implementation and the practical application of those plans including a regional contextualisation/analysis of progress against regional objectives.     

The Large Marine Ecosystem network approach to WSSD targets

Since the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, considerable movement has been made by international organizations engaged in ocean affairs towards adopting ecosystem-based assessment and management practices. A decade later, at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), another significant milestone was reached with the support, by over 100 countries, for a Plan of Implementation that agreed on several specific ecosystem-related targets including: achievement of “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; introduction of the ecosystems approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and the maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. An international financial mechanism, the Global Environment Facility (GEF), is assisting developing countries in meeting the WSSD targets by supporting Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) assessment and management projects. Of the 29 LMEs for which published case study information is available on analyses of principal forces driving changes in biomass yields, fishing effort was the primary forcing mechanism in 14 LMEs, climate forcing was the principal factor in 13 LMEs, eutrophication in one case and the data were inconclusive in another. Fishing effort was a secondary driver of change in biomass yields in the 13 LMEs driven by climate forcing. Mitigating actions for reducing fishing effort to promote recovery of lost biomass yield is proving successful in one case study. Actions for improving forecasts of oceanographic conditions affecting fish stocks are underway in four GEF-supported LME projects (e.g., Humboldt Current, Canary Current, Guinea Current and Benguela Current); measures to assess and manage excessive fishing effort are planned for eight LME projects, eutrophication reduction and control in another; and six LMEs with relatively stable decadal biomass yields appear suitable for mandating precautionary total allowable catch levels. The GEF/LME projects include countries that contributed to 45% of global marine biomass yields in 1999.     

Making the ecosystem approach operational—Can regime shifts in ecological- and governance systems facilitate the transition?

Effectively reducing cumulative impacts on marine ecosystems requires co-evolution between science, policy and practice. Here, long-term social–ecological changes in the Baltic Sea are described, illustrating how the process of making the ecosystem approach operational in a large marine ecosystem can be stimulated. The existing multi-level governance institutions are specifically set up for dealing with individual sectors, but do not adequately support an operational application of the ecosystem approach. The review of ecosystem services in relation to regime shifts and resilience of the Baltic Sea sub-basins, and their driving forces, points to a number of challenges. There is however a movement towards a new governance regime. Bottom-up pilot initiatives can lead to a diffusion of innovation within the existing governance framework. Top-down, enabling EU legislation, can help stimulating innovations and re-organizing governance structures at drainage basin level to the Baltic Sea catchment as a whole. Experimentation and innovation at local to the regional levels is critical for a transition to ecosystem-based management. Establishing science-based learning platforms at sub-basin scales could facilitate this process.     

The South East Regional Marine Plan: Implementing Australia's Oceans Policy

In 1998, the Australian Government released Australia's Oceans Policy (AOP), a world first policy initiative focused on providing a framework for integrated ecosystem-based management of Australia's vast marine domain. The South East Regional Marine Plan, the first regional marine plan to be implemented under AOP, was released on 21 May 2004. This paper argues that although full integration across sectors and jurisdictions has not occurred, new AOP initiatives, institutions and governance processes have considerably increased sectoral and jurisdictional coordination in the South East region.     

Accounting for marine economic activities in large marine ecosystems

We develop an index that is a measure of the intensity of marine activities in large marine ecosystems (LMEs). We compare this marine activity index with an index of socioeconomic development across ocean regions. This comparison identifies regions that may be capable of achieving the sustainable development of their regional marine environment on their own and those that are less likely to do so. The latter may be candidates for international financial or management assistance. An important next step is to carry out detailed case studies designed to improve our understanding of any specific ocean region.     

Fronts in Large Marine Ecosystems

Oceanic fronts shape marine ecosystems; therefore front mapping and characterization are among the most important aspects of physical oceanography. Here we report on the first global remote sensing survey of fronts in the Large Marine Ecosystems (LME). This survey is based on a unique frontal data archive assembled at the University of Rhode Island. Thermal fronts were automatically derived with the edge detection algorithm of (Cayula and Cornillon, 1992), (Cayula and Cornillon, 1995) and (Cayula and Cornillon, 1996) from 12 years of twice-daily, global, 9-km resolution satellite sea surface temperature (SST) fields to produce synoptic (nearly instantaneous) frontal maps, and to compute the long-term mean frequency of occurrence of SST fronts and their gradients. These synoptic and long-term maps were used to identify major quasi-stationary fronts and to derive provisional frontal distribution maps for all LMEs. Since SST fronts are typically collocated with fronts in other water properties such as salinity, density and chlorophyll, digital frontal paths from SST frontal maps can be used in studies of physical–biological correlations at fronts. Frontal patterns in several exemplary LMEs are described and compared, including those for: the East and West Bering Sea LMEs, Sea of Okhotsk LME, East China Sea LME, Yellow Sea LME, North Sea LME, East and West Greenland Shelf LMEs, Newfoundland–Labrador Shelf LME, Northeast and Southeast US Continental Shelf LMEs, Gulf of Mexico LME, and Patagonian Shelf LME. Seasonal evolution of frontal patterns in major upwelling zones reveals an order-of-magnitude growth of frontal scales from summer to winter. A classification of LMEs with regard to the origin and physics of their respective dominant fronts is presented. The proposed classification lends itself to comparative studies of frontal ecosystems.     

Introduction: An empirical framework for deconstructing the realities of governing marine protected areas

Debates surrounding governance strategies for marine protected areas (MPAs) have to date largely focused on top-down, bottom-up or market-based approaches. Whilst co-management approaches for governing MPAs are widely accepted as a way forward for combining these three strategies, many interpretations of this concept exist and it is applied in many different ways in MPAs in different contexts. This study aimed to explore governance through a case-study approach based on a specifically developed empirical framework – the marine protected area governance (MPAG) analysis framework – to increase understanding of how to combine the three governance approaches. A dialogue with MPA practitioners in 20 case studies helped shape the MPAG analysis framework as it developed, and an international workshop was held on ‘Governing MPAs’, bringing the practitioners together to compare results and further develop the framework. This paper provides an overview of the topic and research methodology and briefly introduces the case studies further explored in this special issue.     

海洋环境治理的政策选择

海洋经济的发展必然给海洋环境带来冲击,解决海洋环境问题需要政府、企业和公众三方的共同努力。本文在对海洋环境政策进行结构分析的基础上,从政府与企业关系的角度,对海洋环境治理的政策选择模式进行了具体分析。     

Regulating wave and tidal energy: An industry perspective on the Scottish marine governance framework

The emerging ocean energy industry, which seeks to utilise waves and tides to generate electricity, is developing in many jurisdictions. The UK, and Scotland in particular, is strongly interested in these technologies, and has made considerable efforts to reform its marine governance processes to better meet the needs of innovative new marine industries. This paper provides an industry perspective on this regulatory framework, reporting on the experiences of ocean energy project and technology developers. Semi-structured interviews with companies with practical experience with Scotland's regulatory framework provide evidence of a number of legal and regulatory challenges, as well as interesting insights into how developers are interacting with new marine governance systems. The paper details the findings of these interviews and offers some suggested directions for future research.     

Individual responsibility for the oceans? An evaluation of marine citizenship by UK marine practitioners

In recent times, the governance of the marine environment has evolved from being primarily top down and state directed to being more participatory and community based. This paper proposes that an extension of this trend would be the inculcation of a societal sense of marine citizenship to deliver the sustainable management and protection of the marine environment through enhanced individual involvement in policy development and implementation. The potential role of marine citizenship in UK marine governance was examined by surveying UK marine practitioner’s views on both the current and future role of marine citizenship. Observations from this study identified three key factors for discussion including conflicting opinions over the implementation of marine citizenship into policy; that marine-focused education and a sense of personal attachment are integral to the development of marine citizenship; and that as yet, the potential implications of an enhanced sense of marine citizenship are uncertain. This research highlights the recognition amongst marine practitioners that higher levels of citizen involvement in the management of the marine environment would greatly benefit the marine environment, with additional benefits possible through an increased sense of marine citizenship.     

Reflective practice for marine planning: A case study of marine nature-based tourism partnerships

An essential component of ecosystem-based approaches in coastal zone management and the emerging field of marine planning are partnerships and collaborations between a range of multi-sector organisations and individuals. Ensuring that partnerships are effective is a priority for those responsible for planning and management in coastal and marine environments. Current partnership evaluation approaches, however, tend to view effectiveness as the cumulative end result of a set of variables acting in a linear process at a specific point in time. Given that governance and participation are acknowledged as non-linear and multifaceted processes, more reflective and nuanced approaches that take account of the dynamic, multidimensional and geographically embedded nature of the collaborative process are needed. This paper proposes a new framework for partnership evaluation based on policy narratives and indicators, and demonstrates the potential of the approach using three case studies of partnerships focused upon marine nature-based tourism. The insights from this research have direct relevance to the agencies and organisations responsible for delivering integrated coastal management, including marine spatial planning.     

Scalar reorganisation of marine governance in Europe? The implementation of the marine strategy framework directive in Spain,Portugal and Germany

European marine policies have recently been consolidated, and the scalar organisation of marine governance has been questioned. This paper examines this phenomenon in Europe as a result of implementation of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and examines changes in the role of the national state vis à vis other levels of jurisdiction in marine policy. The relevance of use pressures differs across European member states, as do national policy styles and institutional configurations. Therefore, a nuanced picture is needed regarding the ways European marine policy is being implemented. To this end, the paper employs a co-evolutionary perspective studying the cases of Germany, Spain and Portugal. European marine policy has become anchored in the most relevant policy fields except agriculture and fisheries, and competency regarding its environmental dimension has been strengthened, formalized and clarified as a result of the MSFD. Its implementation, tied to international marine protection, comes following initiatives to develop maritime economies. In Portugal, implementation of the MSFD did not change the scalar organisation of natural resource governance. In Spain and Germany, the MSFD led to disputes regarding clarification of competencies. In the course of implementing the MSFD in Germany, challenges are tied to the political dimensions of formalizing practices and producing integrated policies. In Spain and Portugal, comprehensive stock-taking is itself a challenging task.     

The emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in Europe

This paper provides an overview of the emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in the European Union, which consists of four main categories of policy drivers: environmental legislation, legislation on marine renewable energy, fisheries regulations and the Integrated Maritime Policy. The weak links between these categories of policy drivers, underpinned by a lack of clarity regarding the vision for sustainability, pose major challenges for the emergence of ecosystem-based and integrated marine spatial planning in Europe. In addition, there is still uncertainty arising from on-going reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and discussions on the need for a new marine spatial planning directive. This paper concludes with the view that better integration of environmental concerns into the Common Fisheries Policy is needed to strengthen the link between environmental legislation and fisheries regulations, and that the existing policy landscape, particularly the Marine Strategic Framework Directive, already provides a legal framework for ecosystem-based marine spatial planning. Such a framework is consistent with the recognition that ecosystem conservation underpins other pillars of sustainable development and provides the foundation for cross-sectoral marine planning and management.     

Targeting development assistance to meet WSSD goals for large marine ecosystems and small island developing states

Global commitments agreed in the last two years at Doha, Monterrey, and Johannesburg represent the potential for a political turning point in reversing the degradation of coastal and large marine ecosystems (LMEs). International finance institutions, bilateral donor agencies, international organizations, and governments of the North and South all align their policies and programs if progress is to be made. Since 1992, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) has supported countries to address Chapter 17 of Agenda 21, and in early 2003 GEF adjusted its strategic priorities to align with World Summit targets. This paper outlines GEF support in targeting development assistance for countries in the biodiversity and international waters focal areas related to oceans, coasts, and islands since 1992 with a focus on large marine ecosystems and small island developing states. Examples of GEF projects are provided that illustrate interventions at different scales for coastal and marine systems. Since 1991, GEF has approved 47 projects in its international waters focal area for $454 million GEF and $1.49 billion in total cost as well as 58 projects in the biodiversity area for $330 million from GEF and $1.22 billion in total cost for some 118 countries supporting coastal and marine ecosystem interventions described in the World Summit's Plan of Implementation. While GEF has become the top source of financial assistance for reversing degradation of oceans, coasts, and islands, the pilot scale activities it is able to fund need to be scaled up to meet global poverty reduction, economic security, and World Summit targets through partnerships for individual LMEs.