Organizing coordination in a public marine research and management advice organization: The case of the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research

Public organizations involved in marine management are increasingly confronted with coordination challenges in marine governance. This study examines why and how the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research (IMR) reorganized its formal coordination structures between the areas of fisheries management and marine environmental management. The findings indicate that organizing efficient and, at the same time, legitimate coordination structures between different areas of marine governance is a “wicked” organizational problem with no ultimate and single optimal solution. In contrast to the assumptions of classical organization and management theory, the study finds that the reorganization of formal coordination structures is not necessarily driven for reasons of efficiency and perceived coordination problems. Instead, public marine management organizations also change their organizational structures to live up to external expectations to adopt modern management concepts, such as the Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM). However, the study indicates that the adoption of the EAM has stimulated coordination and integration efforts in the research and advisory activities of the IMR.     

Understanding divergent perspectives in marine governance in Kenya

To understand the subtle institutional conditions that underlie marine governance, beyond broad conceptualisations of property rights or pre-defined institutional designs, it is necessary to situate governance structures and human interactions within their historical and current social and political context. A two-tiered stakeholder analysis was developed to facilitate this. This analytical tool illuminates divergent perspectives between actors in two marine social-ecological systems in Southern Kenya. Investigating these differences emphasises the variety of historical contexts, social geographies, and current power relations in which different groups are situated. These historical and contextual factors mediate how groups perceive and respond to governance. They, therefore, have important implications for how institutions function.     

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.     

Managing organizational change in an international scientific network: A study of ICES reform processes

Organizations involved in the governance of natural resources are challenged to adjust to the call for more holistic management approaches. This often necessitates organizational change. Here change processes in the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) during the years 1998–2009 are investigated using semi-structured interviews combined with observations and review of documents. Several organizational reforms were implemented during the time period studied. The major drivers were the need to improve efficiency and a striving for better integration between different components within the organization. The reform processes were driven forward by individuals who navigated between opportunities and constrains embedded in the network structure of ICES. This required good leadership and communication skills. Broad consultations were important to ensure support within the ICES community. By increasing the understanding of the dynamics of change in organizations, which operate at the science–policy interface developments in desired directions can be facilitated.     

Mapping seascapes of international environmental arrangements in the Coral Triangle

The Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries and Food Security (CTI), adopted recently in response to the degradation of coastal and marine environments in the Southeast Asia-Pacific’s Coral Triangle, emphasises the need for using existing international and regional fora to promote implementation. Large-scale marine initiatives, including the CTI, very often must contend with a remarkably complex institutional system. This raises the question of whether and how such complexity can be conducive to marine resources management. To answer this question, this paper aims to better understand the governance context in which the CTI was established (i.e., map governance fragmentation/complexity), and explore how such a context may support the implementation of the CTI goals (i.e., examine normative interplay). To conduct this examination, it uses an objective method that allows users to view and explore institutional arrangements through a network approach. By documenting the system of existing institutions in the Coral Triangle, the study shows that the Coral Triangle governance system is illustrative of those of international environmental governance. It involves multiple policy domains, and features different institutional arrangements and variability in terms of geographical scope and main subject matter. Such a system is complex and fragmented, marked by jurisdiction and functional overlaps. The paper suggests interplay management, such as inter-institutional learning and enhancing institutional synergy, as a promising process to promote inter-institutional coordination.     

Fishing for opinions: Stakeholder views on MSFD implementation in European Seas

Stakeholder participation is vital when introducing and implementing ecosystem-based management (EBM) at any scale. This paper presents the results of a survey covering four European Regional Seas (Baltic Sea, Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and North-East Atlantic Ocean) aimed to collect stakeholders׳ perspectives on their Regional Sea governance to implement the European Union (EU) Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). In this survey, drivers of good governance including stakeholder involvement, willingness and capacity to cooperate, efficiency, institutional ambiguity and decision-making were explored. The results indicate a clear gap in perception between the current, the ideal and the foreseen situation regarding the implementation of the MSFD. The preferences for the future governance structures vary between stakeholders and across seas although some similarities can be found. Based on the results of the survey, this paper concludes that tailor-made rather than off-the-shelf solutions will be needed to accommodate regional cooperation in the European marine environment for implementing ecosystem-based management under the MSFD.     

Context and differentiation: Comparative analysis of two community-based fishers’ organizations

There has evolved, as of late, a strong interest in decentralized modes of governance over fisheries and other marine resources, particularly that of community-based resource management (CBRM). However, analysis of this institutional model is hindered by simplistic, typological depictions of CBRM. We use organizational theory to argue how, within the broad category of CBRM, there exists a rich variation of institutional forms. We illustrate the analysis by showing how two ostensibly similar fishers’ organizations in Batangas, Philippines, differ in important ways and, furthermore, how these differences respond to particular challenges and opportunities found in their respective contexts. We also discuss implications of this research for program evaluation.     

“Living with our backs to the sea”: A critical analysis of marine and coastal governance in Guatemala

Guatemala's rich coastal and marine biodiversity provides essential ecosystem goods and services to local residents and the national economy through artisanal and commercial fisheries, aquaculture, port exports and, to a lesser extent, tourism. As in many other countries, national policies emphasise the significance of marine conservation and marine resources, primarily through implementing marine protected areas (MPAs). However, this assumes that governance, as reflected in legal, institutional and organizational frameworks, political capacity and human resources is sufficiently developed to ensure MPAs meet these goals. These issues are explored through presenting the first detailed analysis of coastal and marine governance in Guatemala. The research highlights a range of barriers to good governance which restrict the extent to which MPAs can function effectively. Recommendations are made which can capitalise upon the potential for locally managed marine areas as a means to facilitate the improved governance of coastal and marine resources in Guatemala.     

The future role of ICES in the light of changes in fisheries jurisdiction

The author describes the evolution of ICES and the development of its current structures and functions. He shows how cooperation has occurred within ICES in the field of collecting scientific data on fish stocks, and considers the extent to which it has promoted and developed research in the marine biological and oceanographic fields. The author concludes that ICES provides an excellent example of international cooperation in marine affairs, and that it can serve as a model for the development of other international scientific bodies in this field.     

海洋防灾减灾信息共享的现状、问题和对策

为加快海洋防灾减灾信息共享,有力支撑海洋防灾减灾决策,文章概述我国海洋防灾减灾信息共享现状,分析存在的体制机制问题,并提出对策建议。研究结果表明;我国海洋防灾减灾工作的信息支撑主要包括海洋和气象观测监测信息、海洋预报信息、海洋防灾减灾对象及其主体信息以及救灾措施和政策法规信息,通过全国海洋科学数据共享平台等实现信息共享;针对目前海洋防灾减灾信息共享在组织领导机构、统筹规划协调、标准规范和技术支撑、服务意识以及专业人才等体制机制方面存在的不足,亟须组建信息管理机构、构建标准规范体系、开发信息共享平台、提高共享服务意识、培养专业技术队伍和实施考核激励办法。     

Ecosystem-based marine management in European regional seas calls for nested governance structures and coordination—A policy brief

Marine governance in European seas is at a crossroad aiming towards implementation of eco-system based marine management (EBMM) through integration of different EU policies or directives to protect the environment, while at the same time expected to facilitate growth and employment in support of the blue economy. This article shows that the governance landscape at the regional sea level is very complex, fragmented and faced with several dilemmas. It examines the present governance structures in the four European seas (Baltic, Black, and Mediterranean Seas and North East Atlantic Ocean). It is argued that the implementation of EBMM at the regional sea level is characterized by a highly fragmented European governance system where there is lack of coordination between relevant DGs within the European Commission, between EU, International organisations, Regional Sea Conventions and the Member States and between sectoral governance arrangements that should provide sectoral management measures that support EBMM. The article develops suggestions for a nested governance system in which institutions, policies, laws and sectors are nested into a tiered, internally consistent and mutually re-enforcing planning and decision-making system. Developing institutional interaction and soft modes of governance between the EU, the Regional Sea Conventions, Member States and the governance arrangements of the different marine sectors will be crucial in evolving towards such a nested governance system for EBMM. Moreover, there is no one size fits all approach in implementing EBMM, which means that for each European Sea a context-dependent nested governance system should be developed.     

Fragmentation in high seas fisheries: Preliminary reflections on a global oceans governance approach

Notwithstanding the wide range of actions taken to strengthen the legal regime of international fisheries, overexploitation and the risk of depletion of stocks have been strong concerns for decades. Indeed, the regime of international fisheries law is currently not rooted in sustainability, and it does not adequately take into consideration the impact of fishing activities on the wider marine environment. One of the main causes lies in fragmentation of international fisheries law: a lack of coordination between instruments and institutions, and gaps in effective coherent structures for fisheries management. Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), including the high seas, are particularly prone to this lack of coordination and integration.One alternative to reach a durable management of high seas fisheries might be found in a ‘global oceans governance approach’. This paper explores how this approach could impact the fragmented regime of fisheries. It suggests that governance-based perspectives underline concepts rooted in adaptability and interactions, concepts that suggest to approach international fisheries law not as a static set of rules but as an evolutive process. Reflecting on an overarching goal of coordination and possible management challenges in ABNJ provides an interesting starting point to develop a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of oceans governance on the fragmented legal regime of high seas fisheries. We now need to see how to give effect to governance, a task that remains, at this point, a work in progress.     

Is there a need for a new governance model for regionalised Fisheries Management? Implications for science and advice

Over the years, the breadth and depth of EU marine policy has increased with revisions of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and new legislation like the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) and the Framework for Marine Spatial Planning Directive in Europe (FMSP). Not only do these different policies have different remits and hence scope, they also present a multitude of modes of implementation. Although the CFP and MSFD have many common goals when it comes to conservation and sustainable use of living marine resources, they differ substantially in governance set up and implementation modalities, including the underlying scientific advisory processes and structures. Regional cooperation and coordination is foreseen, but there is no governance model in place to coordinate requests for scientific advice, nor institutions coordinating the activities of advice providers, either across policies or across regions. This results in an increase in uncoordinated requests for scientific advice yet the pool of experts fuelling the advisory system is limited. As a result the European marine scientific advisory system is increasingly under pressure. In this paper the consequences of this problem are analysed and a redesign of the institutional governance setting to accommodate these challenges and make the science and advice system ready for the future is explored.     

Governing large-scale marine commons: Contextual challenges in the Coral Triangle

Environment and development agendas are increasingly being characterised by regional-scale initiatives. This trend is in part motivated by recognition of the need to account for global drivers of change (e.g., climate change, migration, and globalisation), the aspirations of achieving large-scale ecological goals (such as maintaining ecosystem processes), and reconciling potentially conflicting priorities in multi-use planning. However, regional-scale governance is challenging and there is little theoretical guidance or empirical evidence to suggest how it can be achieved. This paper uses the Institutional Analysis and Development framework to highlight the diverse contextual factors that challenge governance of a large-scale marine common, using an example of the Coral Triangle Initiative. The analysis points to the need for a critical, reflexive approach to the Coral Triangle Initiative if it is to effectively navigate diverse contexts and reconcile multiple objectives in the region. Recognising the heterogeneous, multi-scale and interlinked nature of large-scale marine systems is critical. Coping with contextual complexity will require innovative approaches that strive to be inclusive of varied perspectives and actors, enable and support effective collective-choice arrangements at lower levels of organisation, and organise and link diverse institutional arrangements at multiple scales. Large-scale marine governance will also involve a great deal of experimentation and regular adjustments to governance arrangements to account for the dynamic nature of regional commons.     

Can existing institutions protect biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction? Experiences from two on-going processes

United Nations discussions on the governance of marine areas beyond national jurisdiction have questioned, but not yet reached a decision, on whether existing institutional agreements and structures are sufficient to meet global commitments to protect marine biodiversity, or if additional mechanisms may be required. This paper considers two very different efforts to protect marine biodiversity in these areas: (1) in the North-East Atlantic through the efforts of OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic; and (2) in the central Atlantic, through the efforts of the Sargasso Sea Alliance led by the Bermuda government. In each case, action has been strongly supported by non-governmental organisations and subsequent progress has hinged upon on-going dedicated efforts of “champion” governments to bring other States on board. This paper outlines the difficulties that they have faced, and consequently why they have been time-consuming, and are not yet completed. The paper then considers 10 common recommendations that can be drawn from the experiences of these two distinct initiatives, and their relevance to on-going UN deliberations.     

‘The Hare and the Tortoise’: Lessons from Baltic Sea and Mediterranean Sea governance

Commonly, the Baltic Sea is pictured as a proactive region with a long-standing tradition for cooperation and surrounded by the “greenest” EU countries. In contrast, southern countries often suffer from the “Mediterranean Syndrome” in which the heterogenous socio political situation is given as the “proof” that cooperation would not work. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive adopted by European Union in 2008 is an important step towards ecosystem-based marine management and provides a legal document suggesting marine regions as a scale for cooperation. In this paper, we aim to explore stakeholders׳ perspectives on key factors for good governance at the regional sea level covering the Eastern Baltic States and the south of France. We targeted a broad panel of professionals from different sectors with a political, economic or societal importance in the respective seas. We suggest that Baltic and Mediterranean stakeholders are going through very different stages of governance adjustment fitting the purpose of ecosystem-based marine management. Baltic institutions are well established, which in some way prevents structural analysis of whether the current governance model is the most appropriate reaching GES. In the Mediterranean, the EU strategies faces institutional challenges, which is leading stakeholders to think “out of the box” about what is really needed for implementing ecosystem-based marine management for this sea. It is suggested that a golden opportunity exists at present in the Mediterranean to create a regional platform of cooperation, not only to fit the MSFD implementation, but also to improve governance of the Mediterranean Sea and its environmental status.     

Regional cooperation for European seas: Governance models in support of the implementation of the MSFD

During the implementation process of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Member States are expected to cooperate and coordinate at the regional sea level as wells as arrange stakeholder involvement. However, the MSFD does not specify any governing structures to do so. The aim of this paper is to address these key challenges of the MSFD by developing four governance models for regional cooperation and assess their impact on governance performance. The four models are based on the building blocks of stakeholder involvement (low or high) and decision-making power (binding or non-binding decisions): (1) Cross-border platforms; (2) Regional Sea Convention-PLUS; (3) Advisory Alliance and (4) Regional Sea Assembly. Secondly, the paper will do an ex ante assessment on how the alternative models will have an impact on governance performance. The assessment criteria for governance performance are: (a) costs to set up and run a model; (b) capacity to cooperate; (c) policy coordination; (d) institutional ambiguity; and (e) implementation drift. In addition to this assessment of the performance based on expert judgement (i.e. scientists of WP7 of the ODEMM project), 4 roundtable discussions have been undertaken in which stakeholders from the four regional seas did an assessment of the four models. The main conclusion is that increasing stakeholder participation, a much desired development in regional organisation of marine management as expressed by the stakeholder community, will increase the costs of the policy making process. If stakeholder participation is not embedded in a wider institutional setting in which the participation of stakeholders is directly related to the policy process and the degree to which decisions taken are binding, the increase of costs does not lead to a more smoothly running model.     

Non-sectarian scenario experiments in socio-ecological knowledge building for multi-use marine environments: Insights from New Zealand's Marine Futures project

The challenges of managing marine ecosystems for multiple users, while well recognised, has not led to clear strategies, principles or practice. The paper uses novel workshop based thought-experiments to address these concerns. These took the form of trans-disciplinary Non-Sectarian Scenario Experiments (NSSE), involving participants who agreed to put aside their disciplinary interests and commercial and institutional obligations. The NSSE form of co-production of knowledge is a distinctive addition to the participatory and scenario literatures in marine resource management (MRM). Set in the context of resource use conflicts in New Zealand, the workshops assembled diverse participants in the marine economy to co-develop and co-explore the making of socio-ecological knowledge and identify capability required for a new generation of multi-use oriented resource management. The thought-experiments assumed that non-sectarian navigation of scenarios will resource a step-change in marine management by facilitating new connections, relationships, and understandings of potential marine futures. Two questions guided workshop interactions: what science needs spring from pursuing imaginable possibilities and directions in a field of scenarios, and what kinds of institutions would aid the generation of science knowledge, and it application to policy and management solutions. The effectiveness of the thought- experiments helped identify ways of dealing with core problems in multi-use marine management, such as the urgent need to cope with ecological and socio-economic surprise, and define and address cumulative impacts. Discussion focuses on how the workshops offered fresh perspectives and insights into a number of challenges. These challenges include building relations of trust and collective organisation, showing the importance of values-means-ends pathways, developing facilitative legislation to enable initiatives, and the utility of the NSSEs in informing new governance and management directions in multi-use marine environments.     

生态命运共同体视角下完善海洋环境合作治理机制建设研究

为有效应对我国海洋环境污染和提高海洋环境治理现代化水平,文章以辽宁为例,在生态命运共同体理念的指导下分析海洋环境治理现状及其存在的问题,基于信息融合技术建立海洋环境合作治理机制并提出对策建议。研究结果表明：加强海洋环境治理是海洋经济高质量和可持续发展的重要保障,目前亟待解决的突出问题主要包括陆海联动和多元主体参与机制不...     

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.