(2016) Exploring the winners and losers of marine environmental governance/Marine spatial planning: Cuibono?/"More than fishy business": epistemology, integration and conflict in marine spatial planning/Marine spatial planning: power and scaping/Surely not all planning is evil?/Marine spatial planning: a Canadian perspective/ Maritime spatial planning -"adutilitatemomnium"/Marine spatial planning: "it is better to be on the train than being hit by it"/Reflections from the perspective of recreational anglers and boats for hire/Maritime spatial planning and marine renewable energy, Planning Theory & Practice, 17:1, 121-151, DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2015 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10. 1080/14649357.2015.1131482 Published online: 04 Mar 2016. Submit your article to this journalFull Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rptp20 INTERFACE INTERFACE Exploring the winners and losers of marine environmental governance Wesley Flannery and Geraint EllisSchool of Planning, architecture and civil engineering, Queen's University, Belfast, UK IntroductionMarine Spatial Planning (MSP) has rapidly become the most commonly endorsed management regime for sustainable development in the marine environment. MSP is advocated as a means of managing human uses of the sea in a sustainable manner, in the face of ever-increasing demands on marine resources. While MSP is quickly becoming the dominant marine management paradigm, there has been comparatively little assessment of the potential negative impacts and possible distributive impacts that may arise from its adoption. This should be a key challenge for both academic and practitioner communities and therefore offers a fruitful topic for Interface.In the contributions that follow, we hear from a range of voices and perspectives on these important themes. The lead paper (Ellis and Flannery, argues for a broader, more critical, understanding of the social and distributive impacts of MSP, advocating a radical turn in MSP away from a rationalism of science and neoliberal logic towards more equity-based, democratic decision-making and a fairer distribution of our ocean wealth.Then, eight responses follow, from academics, planners, policymakers and industry representatives around the world. The first two come from academics, Nursey-Bray and van Tatenhove, (pp. 129-135) who each broadly endorse the core arguments of the lead paper and advocate for a radical MSP. Nursey-Bray suggests this requires rethinking MSP as a process of cultural co-existence rather than as a tool for managing multiple uses. Van Tatenhove argues that this would involve highlighting the power dynamics involved, the interplay of structure and agency in MSP processes and how this affects the quality of planning.The next three responses offer insights from marine planners and managers. , reflecting on her experience as a marine planner in the Shetland Islands, argues that while a call for a radical MSP is well-timed, it is over...

No abstract

The North Sea is one of the busiest marine areas in the world. It is also a major fisheries ground. Bordered by seven countries with their own spatial uses and claims, the stage is set for complex and demanding governance challenges. Recent decades have also seen user groups multiply, competition for space and resources increase, and the pressure on the marine environment and its living natural resources grow. As governments strive to balance conservation and economic development needs, they also have to deal with inter-as well as intra-national user conflicts. Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) has arrived as a new approach to these issues. It is argued that for North Sea fishing people and their communities MSP holds risks as well as opportunities, depending on which institutions are formed and what role they are allowed to play in the planning process.

Professional fishing and fisheries quota systems can affect women and men differently, yet gender analysis of quota systems is rare. In this article, we use a feminist framing and a mixed methods approach to examine the long-term gendered effects of the introduction of the 1990 quota system in Norway. Using statistics from the National Fishery Registry and the Directorate of Fisheries, we found that the number of women and men registered as fishers has declined since 1990 (an overall decline of 59%). Over this period, men have consistently outnumbered women among registered fishers (2.7-3.2% women), among boat owners (2.23% women in 2017) and particularly among owners of larger boats (> 11 m), which can have multiple quotas (0.35% women in 2017). However, changes in the age and geographic location among women fishers reflect changes to fisheries overall, as well as highlighting the gender-blind entry barriers that disproportionately impact women. In addition, contextualising statistical data with participant interviews conducted in North Norway, especially in Finnmark, enables us to examine more closely why the gender gap remains. This mixed method approach also identifies changes women and men working in fisheries have undergone, while also addressing women fishers' political efforts to improve gender equity in Norwegian fisheries. Our study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of Norwegian coastal fishing, and particularly women's small but significant presence.

No abstract