Search

What makes an experience sustainable? Can polar cruise tourism in the High Arctic ever be sustainable? If so, under what conditions? These questions guide this report as it explores tensions embedded in the concept of ‘sustainable polar cruise tourism’. These matters are of particular importance in Svalbard, with a rapidly developing tourism sector being an important part of the Svalbard economy. The report is based on a participatory workshop held on-board a recent expedition to the Svalbard archipelago, the so-called SEES expedition (the Scientific Expedition Edgeøya Svalbard). Conducted as a combined scientific and touristic expedition, the SEES expedition offers opportunity to explore the meaning(s) of sustainability among environmentally aware visitors representing key actor groups on Svalbard. The purpose of the report is thus to contribute to ongoing conversations on the paradoxes of sustainable polar tourism by sharing experiences and perspectives on what sustainability can mean from a passenger point of view.

Highlights •A solid knowledgebase and governance process is required to develop policies for sustainable growth of offshore aquaculture in the North Sea. •Environmental goals largely define maximum sustainable production levels. For seaweed culture this is limited to the scale of several hundred km2. •Definition of realistic ambitions is a process rather than a fixed value and greatly benefits from a ‘learning by doing’ approach.

We reflect on the innovation process that led to the development of the pulse trawl that was successfully trialed at a commercial scale, but eventually ended with the European Parliament passing legislation to ban its use. The ban was imposed despite published and emerging evidence that suggested that the environmental performance and catch efficiency of the pulse trawl was superior to the conventional beam trawl design. We used a stakeholder questionnaire to understand which factors undermined wider acceptance of the pulse trawl. The main factors where a lack of involvement of certain key stakeholders earlier in the process that would have ensured better co-development of innovation and a shared vision of the environmental or governance questions that needed to be addressed. Although the stakeholder process itself was seen to be positive, it was implemented too late in the innovation process, as was the implementation of an independent peer review process. We conclude by identifying a pathway for future fishing gear innovation processes that integrate the lessons learnt from the pulse trawl innovation process.

According to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, a “Whole-of-Society” approach is needed to initiate transitions to a nature-positive society. Many look at civil society to initiate and accelerate such transitions. In this article, we investigate strategies from Civil Society Actors (CSAs) to contribute to transformative change, with specific focus on Tiny Forests and Beach Clean-Ups in the Netherlands. Results show that CSAs have a clear Theory of Change to achieve their goals, and act upon that vision through assembling power and resources, developing policy-relevant environmental knowledge, mobilising public support and media coverage and initiating innovative sustainable practices. Adopting mosaic governance approaches, CSAs strategically position themselves in social and institutional networks, connecting professionals and citizens for political leverage. However, our findings show that the step from local impact towards transition remains a large one and the contribution of CSAs should be valued as emergent, co-produced and part of a broader transition movement.

Improving the selectivity of fishing gear and practices has been a challenge for fishers, scientists, and policy-makers for decades. In Europe, urgency increased with the introduction of the landing obligation. Voluntary uptake of proven selective gears has been poor across the globe. To increase uptake levels, a move from science-led to industry-led development of selective gears has been advocated. In the Netherlands, gear innovation has, since the mid-2000s, been fisher-led. Nevertheless, this did not result in the assumed increase in uptake. Our qualitative study amongst Dutch demersal fishers shows that decisions to voluntarily adopt proven fishing gear are driven by a complex interplay of social, policy, and science-related factors. These can be attributed to two behavioural components: Willingness and Ability. Willingness, our study showed, is closely linked to: (i) intrinsic motivations and beliefs about sustainable fishing as well as perceptions about the motivations and behaviour of other fishers; (ii) the extent to which fishers consider policy goals and regulations as legitimate; and (iii) strong normative beliefs amongst fishers about the presence (or absence) of a level playing field, in terms of both the same rules applying to all and trust in compliance and enforcement. Ability is associated with knowledge, skills, economic, and legal possibilities to enable voluntary uptake, and tends to be the focus of science and policy. We conclude that a narrow focus on Ability as a driver for encouraging selective fishing is unlikely to result in real changes, and recommend a stronger emphasis on addressing social, policy- and science-related factors associated with Willingness in encouraging more selective fisheries.

The increasingly complex nature of marine resource management calls for stronger stakeholder participation in advancing knowledge and developing management approaches. Studies on stakeholder involvement in marine resource management have primarily focussed on participation in resource use negotiation and not on participation in science. Using fishers' knowledge research frameworks, we evaluate over 15 years of science-industry research collaboration (SIRC) in Dutch demersal fisheries. Four key lessons emerge: (a) Capacity building in SIRC works multiple ways and triggers shifts in the fishers' knowledge research spectrum; (b) Successful SIRC depends on acceptance of industry collected data for scientific advice, which necessitates close involvement of end-users from the outset to provide feedback and obtain support; (c) (Fisher) participation raises often-overlooked equity questions and may result in selection bias; and (d) The governance context strongly influences structure of SIRC and integration of SIRC knowledge. To ensure a sustainable, continuous process of stakeholder participation and use of their knowledge in marine resources research, collaborative research should be embedded in the institutional frameworks for science and management. It demands continuous maintenance of the relationship between scientists and stakeholders in the context of management developments, calls for reflection about selection and equity considerations, and requires continuous attention for communication with all parties involved at different levels. The lessons learnt in science-industry research collaboration in fisheries are also relevant for the wider field of marine science, where stakeholder participation is necessary but not yet common.

Based on 20 years of experience in collaborative fisheries research with fishers (science-industry research collaboration: SIRC), we will reflect on three critical, interlinked issues that need to be tackled to bring co-production of knowledge through SIRC to the next level. (1) The impact of the link between governance and science on SIRC: Role definition is important in SIRC. (2) Barriers to high level SIRC: There are levels of SIRC, the lowest level of collaboration is fishers providing their vessels as research platforms. (3) Use of different types of knowledge: In established science systems in support of marine management, there is strong preference for quantitative information. Based on concrete examples from SIRC experiences in the Netherlands and published cases from elsewhere, we will discuss these critical issues and how they are interlinked. For instance, the inclusion of experiential knowledge in science may have (real or perceived) risks for stakeholder participation in governance. We will also propose ways forward.

International audience; The shifting policy focus towards Ecosystem Based Management in Fisheries (EBFM) requires the integration of knowledge and disciplines and the engagement of stakeholders to support decision-making processes. Scientists contribute to this through (i) participatory research projects, (ii) stakeholder partnerships and (iii) institutional scientific advice processes. Understanding the role of scientists in such processes, the nature of the interactions between scientists, stakeholders and managers in knowledge integration and the link between science and policy is an emerging field of research addressing transdisciplinary challenges. In 2018, Ifremer-UMR AMURE organized the workshop ‘Science, Partnership and Decision-support in Fisheries’ bringing together international scientists from natural and social sciences to conduct a review based on twenty concrete case studies. Findings indicate that science-stakeholder-manager partnerships for decision-support in fisheries can play an essential role in the transition to EBFM. To foster this transition, eight recommendations are presented that cover the roles of the different participants, the expectations of partnerships, capacity building, the integration of the social sciences, and funding structures. Further, it is recommended that future research and innovation framework programmes into sustainable fisheries and other ocean uses should explicitly include mechanisms to foster transdisciplinary approaches and the development of best practices. Building-up networks and developing reflexive approaches to review experiences and practices for transdisciplinary approaches in EFBM decision-support will contribute to design the next generation transdisciplinary platforms and generating actionable knowledge towards EBFM.

Het ministerie van LNV heeft in de Kennis- en innovatieagenda LNV 2019-2030 de koers voor de komende tien jaar en de uitvoering hiervan bepaald. Vanuit het Noordzee2030-programma is door de ministeries van LNV en van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat (IENW) het initiatief genomen om een Kennisagenda op te stellen, waarin de vragen die de verschillende belanghebbenden hebben gesteld tijdens het consultatieproces rond Noordzee2030, zijn samengevat (Ministerie van LNV & IENW, 2018). De Kennisagenda vormde belangrijke input voor de ambities en bijbehorende innovatieopgaven van het Ministerie van LNV. Wat ontbreekt, is een analyse van vraag en aanbod, met andere woorden: Welke kennisvragen zijn afgedekt binnen lopende programma's en welke nog niet? En wat betekent dit voor de programmering van het Ministerie van LNV. Voorliggende programmeringsstudie beschrijft de kennis- en innovatieopgaven die gekoppeld zijn aan duurzaam meervoudig gebruik van Noordzee. Hierbij staan de realisatie van de energietransitie, het efficiënt inrichten van de ruimte op de Noordzee om zoveel mogelijk bestaande en nieuwe activiteiten duurzaam te kunnen laten plaatsvinden en het verbeteren van de ecologische kwaliteit van de Noordzee, centraal.

Deze Achtergrondrapportage hoort bij twee andere, afzonderlijke programmeringsstudies: Duurzame Noordzee (Steins et al., 2019) en Visserij (Smith et al., 2019). Deze programmeringsstudies schetsen een beeld van de onderzoeks- en innovatieopgaven die nodig zijn om de ambities van het ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (LNV) ten aanzien van duurzame visserij en duurzaam meervoudig gebruik van de Noordzee waar te maken.

Het ministerie van LNV heeft in de Kennis- en innovatieagenda LNV 2019-2030 de koers voor de komende tien jaar en de uitvoering hiervan bepaald. In de Kennisagenda Noordzee 2030 zijn visserij-gerelateerde vragen samengevat die de verschillende belanghebbenden hebben gesteld tijdens het consultatieproces rond het Noordzee2030-programma (Ministerie van LNV & I&W, 2018). Ter aanvulling is op verzoek van het ministerie van LNV, gekeken welke aanvullende vragen er leven onder de stakeholders. Om inzicht te krijgen in de vraagstukken die belanghebbenden hebben omtrent een duurzame kust- en zeevisserij op de Noordzee zijn in voorliggende programmeringsstudie kennis- en innovatievragen verzameld door middel van het uitvoeren van interviews met stakeholders (visserijsector, enkele NGO’s, beleid). Aanvullend op de interviews is een online enquête uitgezet via social media om zoveel mogelijk belanghebbenden te bereiken en hen de mogelijkheid te bieden om de kennis- en innovatievragen die zij hebben aan te leveren. Daarnaast zijn twee stakeholderbijeenkomsten georganiseerd om input te krijgen op de programmeringsstudie. Hierbij is gekeken naar 9 deelthema’s: • minder emissies • betere arbeidsomstandigheden • betere dierenwelzijn • minder bodemberoering • betere selectiviteit • bovengenoemde aspecten en daarbij een goede boterham verdienen • het versterken van het beheer van de visbestanden • de realisatie van systeemveranderingen in de visserij • de realisatie van circulaire visserij.

Self-regulation is now widely regarded as an effective mechanism for collective action aimed at sustainable management of common pool resources. The brown shrimp (Crangon crangon) fishing industry in the Netherlands has been working on the implementation of a self-management strategy since 2007, as part of its ambition to get certified to the Marine Stewardship Council standard. Part of the self-management strategy is the development of a harvest control rule for reducing fishing effort when catches are low. Until recently, these attempts failed. The failure of the initiatives for self-management is examined within Ostrom’s nested framework for understanding institutions for managing resource use. This framework emphasises the importance of strong vertical embeddedness of institutional arrangements for resource (co)management. Our analysis shows that, despite a strong vertical embeddedness, mismatches between different institutional frameworks at the same level (horizontal interaction) affect the performance of self-management at the organizational level. This inhibits the resource users’ collective actions to self-manage their brown shrimp fishery, leading to a potential commons tragedy.

Summaries The article offers theoretical insights from Actor‐Network Theory (ANT) as to how natural resource management (NRM) perspectives might be enhanced. ANT asks us to abolish the conventional sociological practice of studying phenomena in terms of predefined categories and principles, as they hinder our analysis of how the stakeholders involved construct resource management processes and the way these constructions are used. In this analytical process, any (uncertain) outcome of NRM is regarded as an effect of the interplay amongst the different stakes in the resource and the way stakeholders continuously mobilise social and material resources in order to achieve their goals. Only by analysing how certain outcomes have been achieved can we develop our understanding of the dynamics and uncertainties involved in NRM. The article uses empirical examples from coastal management scenarios to illustrate these theoretical points.

The question of how to organize the sustainable exploitation of common-pool resources (CPRs) is an important issue on a global environmental agenda. We argue that the current approach to collective action in CPR management has a number of shortcomings related to (1) the focus on single - use CPRs and (2) the formulation of a priori design principles for successful collective action, which hinders rather than facilitates CPR research and policies. We propose a social constructivist perspective for the study of CPRs, and discuss its implications for research and policy programs. This approach studies the CPR as an entity within a wider external environment, focusing on resource users’ motivations for certain action strategies. The outcome of collective management is considered to be the result of interactions between stakeholders and nonhuman entities, which depends on the way social actors ’socially construct’ their everyday reality. A case study of Irish fishermen, who felt alienated from their fishery as a result of the expansion of commercial finfish farms, and who created common property rights to secure access to the fishery, forms the empirical basis for this study.

In this special issue, Steins and Edwards introduced the notion of nested platforms for resource use negotiation as a tool to facilitate collective action amongst multiple-users in complex common-pool resource management scenarios. Five discussion statements were put forward to aid the debate on multi-use platforms. This paper is a synthesis of the responses to these statements by the other contributors to this special issue. It aims to further stimulate the debate on the management of complex, multiple-use common-pool management scenarios.

One of the key issues to be resolved in the management of natural resources is the extent to which resources can be used and managed in common. With its focus on shared rights, responsibilities and use, common pool resource (CPR) theory has much to offer natural resource policy and planning. However, the policy models and frameworks developed under CPR theory tend to ignore the economic, political, social and cultural context of a resource situation. Such context helps to determine how the actors in a resource situation relate to their social and natural environment and so make resource decisions. Contextual factors are dynamic forces based locally and remotely from resource management regimes and define (i) what is physically, legally, economically and socially feasible in terms of the supply of products and services from a resource; and (ii) what is economically, socially and culturally desirable, by establishing the demand factor. This paper presents a framework of analysis for CPRs, which proposes that there is a contextual factor continuum, forming a series of relationships from local contextual factors to the more remote. The researcher is advised to ‘backsolve’ from resource use outcomes to contextual factors, via the choice sets available to resource users in terms of (i) products and services demanded, (ii) different decision-making rules, and (iii) different action strategies. Such analysis is crucial in informing effective policy review and subsequent changes to institutions.

Collective action processes in complex, multiple-use common-pool resources (CPRs) have only recently become a focus of study. When CPRs evolve into more complex systems, resource use by separate user groups becomes increasingly interdependent. This implies, amongst others, that the institutional framework governing resource use has to be re-negotiated to avoid adverse impacts associated with the increased access of any new stakeholders, such as overexploitation, alienation of traditional users, and inter-user conflicts. The establishment of “platforms for resource use negotiation” is a way of dealing with complex natural resource management problems. Platforms arise when stakeholders perceive the same resource management problem, realize their interdependence in solving it, and come together to agree on action strategies for solving the problem (Roling, 1994). This article sets the scene for a discussion in this Special Issue about the potential of nested platforms for resource use negotiation in facilitating collective action in the management of complex, multiple-use CPRs. The article has five objectives. First, we define “collective action” in the context of this paper. Second, we discuss the importance of collective action in multiple-use CPRs. Third, we introduce the concept of platforms to coordinate collective action by multiple users. Fourth, we address some issues that emerge from evidence in the field regarding the role and potential of nested platforms for managing complex CPRs. Finally, we raise five discussion statements. These will form the basis for the collection of articles in this special issue.

The management of common-pool resources (CPRs) has gained increased attention in the debate about sustainable environmental management. Research on CPR management has mainly concentrated on single-use resources. Since CPRs develop over time to include new extractive and non-extractive users, a multiple-use perspective on their governance is needed. In «multiple-use CPRs» co-ordination and monitoring of the various activities is an integral part of resource management; decision-making processes play a key role in this collective management. This paper develops a heuristic framework for the analysis of decision-making processes in multiple-use CPRs. The framework is based on a case study of three selected harbour uses in the port of Cowes (UK): (1) the oyster fishery; (2) the yachting industry; and (3) cargo shipping, and draws heavily on an analytical framework for single-use CPRs developed by Oakerson. The Oakerson Framework has been re-developed by adapting it to «vertical» and «horizontal» multi-level analysis, including «multiple-levels of decision-making arrangements» and «multiple users», as integral variables. The paper also examines the extent to which user groups can influence the management of a multiple-use CPR as a whole. In cases where such governance remains with an «umbrella authority», the users» ability to influence decisions by the umbrella organization is strongly related to the historical, socio-economic and organizational characteristics of the specific resource use and on the users» strength at the organizational level. While the presence of an umbrella authority may facilitate CPR management, under-representation of specific user groups in decision-making may serve as a catalyst for institutional change for that particular use, in an attempt to find other means of control.

This paper addresses the issue of overlapping fisheries regulations by multiple authorities for coastal fisheries in the United Kingdom. It examines one particular case study of the oyster fishers of the Isle of Wight, focusing on resource management regulations, fishermen's strategies to deal with ambiguous legislation, and the response of the various management authorities. The case study forms the basis on which to discuss institutional implications for effective operational management of the UK's coastal fisheries resource.

Fisheries management in Europe is confronted by a situation of exceptional complexity such as is found nowhere else in the world. Not only is the coastline highly fragmented and deeply indented, with much of the marine space separated off into distinctive semi-enclosed areas like the Baltic, North, Mediterranean and Black seas, but responsibility for fisheries management is also divided among a large and growing number of coastal states.

The Irish Republic is essentially an island state. Its long, irregular and in parts deeply incised coastline shelters nearly 900 ports, small harbours and landing places — though many lack the basic infrastructure for handling regular consignments of fish. At the time of entry into the EU in 1973, Ireland’s fisheries were seriously undervalued, weakly developed and poorly organised. Landings totalled a mere 85,500 tonnes. Over the past quarter of a century, while some Member States have faced declining landings and increasing pressures to reduce fishing capacity, Ireland has experienced a period of new investment, vigorous modernisation and strong growth in fishing activity. By 1997, landings had more than tripled to circa 300,000 tonnes. Nonetheless, fishing still accounted for no more than 1% of GDP and employment.

This paper introduces this Special Issue on the Role of Contextual Factors in Common Pool Resource (CPR) research and provides an introduction to CPR theory. It advocates an interdisciplinary, holistic approach to natural resource policy analysis, which assumes the entire resource system, and the wider social, cultural, ecological and economic environment in which it is embedded, as the correct subject for research. The paper recognizes the need to examine how different users of resource systems interrelate and how each relates to their environment. It calls for more diachronic research and for research that extends beyond the geographical boundaries of a particular resource system. Contextual analysis must be focused at different levels. While contextual factors vary from resource situation to resource situation, generic categories of factors may be useful. The uncertainty of contextual influence demands that a balance is struck between the need for flexible management regimes, which allow users to adapt to changing contexts, and the need for stable, long-term resource management planning. The ability to incorporate the knowledge systems of the user groups into policy and management frameworks may determine the extent to which they are able to adapt to change in time to prevent resource deterioration. In doing so, the researcher should be aware that both the research and researcher are contextual factors that may become internalized. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.