Coastal planning on the Atlantic fringe,north Norway: the power game |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo 2007, NSW, Australia;2. WorldFish, Jalan Batu Maung, Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia;3. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville 4811, QLD, Australia;4. School of Geography, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3052, VIC, Australia;5. Center for Strategic Policy and Governance, Palawan State University, Tiniguiban Heights, 5300 Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, Philippines;1. School of Environment, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand;2. Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand;3. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd, Private Bag 11-115, Hamilton, New Zealand;4. Red Sea Research Center, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Jeddah 23955, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia;1. New Economics Foundation, 10 Salamanca Place, SE1 7HB London, UK;2. Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority, 64 Ashley Road, Poole, Dorset BH14 9BN, UK;3. Environment Department, University of York, York YO10 5NG, UK;1. School of Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, PO Box 1700 STN CSC, Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 2Y2;2. Central Coast Indigenous Resource Alliance (CCIRA), Campbell River, BC, Canada;1. Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), Fahrenheitstr. 6, 28359 Bremen, Germany;2. Jacobs University, Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | The article describes an on-going struggle between local planning authorities, regional fishery authorities and environmental authorities over the management of the Norwegian coastal zone. Particular reference is made to a recent planning project in Nordland County where 18 peripheral communes with weak planning traditions joined forces to produce structure plans for their coastal areas. Concepts of rationality and power are used as points of departure for an interpretation of the actions of the parties involved. The discursively rational nature of the planning project, embodying principles of consensus building, social integration and personal growth, is contrasted to the strictly instrumental behaviour of regional fishery and environmental authorities. The article also relates conflicts between communes and regional sector authorities to the power structure of the field of coastal management and the habitus of the different institutional actors. The actions of the fishery authorities are seen as a defence of their monopoly of the production of ideology in marine management, while the actions of the communes are interpreted as a bid by the periphery for greater control over local resources. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
